Igny,
The disgruntled old turd has had case after case thrown out. What
does that tell you about him and his hijinks?
Have you read the other pages about him?
>Have you actually read the article?
Yes. Have you read my other pages and taken this in context with
them?
>The court ruled on the issue of burden of proof. It ruled that
>supplement makers do not have to test their product. It did not decide
>that homeopathic products are beneficial for health.
Did I say that it did? What I am saying is that this is just one more
case that points to his aim to stop at *nothing* until "alternative"
medicine is wiped out.
Joe
>i
>
>> http://pro-networkers.com/bbs/messages/12137.html
>>
>> Joe
Ignoramus14327 - 07 Nov 2003 19:48 GMT
> Igny,
>
> The disgruntled old turd has had case after case thrown out. What
> does that tell you about him and his hijinks?
>
> Have you read the other pages about him?
I did read some pages and yes, I consider him to be less credible
after I read some of those pages.
i
>>Have you actually read the article?
>
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
>>>
>>> Joe
Yep. You've just put your finger on the problem. People
don't understand that supplements are not regulated as
far as testing is concerned. That is because in the US
they are not classed as drugs, if they were the FDA would
regulate their testing.
> Have you actually read the article?
>
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> >
> > Joe